24

E O1 X O2
C O1 X O2
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
This part deals with description of research design, variables, population
and sample, instrument of the research, data collecting procedure, and technique
of data analysis.
A. Research Design
In this research, the researcher applied quasi experimental design. The
students were devided into two classes namely experimental class and control
class. Both classes were given pretest and posttest to measure the students ability
in speaking. Experimental class were given treatment by using small group
discussion based on gender wheter control class were given conventional
technique in general as the comparing with the experimental class.
Both classes were given pretest and posttest. Pretest was administered prior
to treatment to assess their speaking ability. Posttest was administered to measure
treatment effects. The aim of this was to find out the effectiveness of small group
discussion based on gender to improve the students ability in speaking English.
By this consideration, the reseacher saw the differences of achievement
between experiment and control class. The design is presented as follows:



Where :
25

E : Experimental Class
C : Control Class
O1 : Pre-test
O2 : Post-test
X1 :Treatment for experimental class using small group discussion
based on gender
X2 :Treatment for control class whithout using small group
discussion based on gender
(Gay et al, 2006)
B. Research Variables and Operational Definition
1. Variables
This research has two variables, independent variable and dependent
variable.
a. Independent variable is the use of small group discussion based on
gender as a learning interaction technique in the classroom.
b. Dependent variable is the students improvement in English
speaking ability.
2. Operational Definition of the Variables
a. Small group discussion based on gender
Small group discussion based on gender in this reseacrh as a media to
help to bridge achievement differences in speaking ability between
male and female stundents and to express their ideas in speaking in
order they can enjoy the learning process. By the limitation, the
26

students were devided based on their gender (same gender group). They
were male group and female group.
b. Speaking skill
Speaking skill is the students competence in speaking by using small
group discussion based on gender. So, it affected their speaking in
accuracy, fluency, comprehencibility.
C. Population and Sample
1. Population
The population of the research was the twelfth year students of SMA
Model Negeri 2 Watampone academic year 2011/2012. That consist of
12 classes and each class consist of 30 students. So, the total number of
population are 360 students.
2. Sample
The reseacher used cluster random sampling technique that carry out by
choosing two classes of the twelfth year students of SMA Model
Negeri 2 Watampone randomly. It consist of 60 students from two
classes, namely 30 students for Experimental class from Exact 1 and 30
students from Exact 2 as control class.
D. Instrument of the Research
The researcher used speaking test as instrument of this research. The
researcher asked the students by interviewing them one by one. The test
conducted to measure the students ability in speaking. The pretest were given to
the students before the treatment to get the data on the students about prior
27

knowledge or the starting point of speaking skill. And they were given posttest
after the treatment to get the data of the impact of using small group discussion
based on gender in improving the students abilty in speaking.
E. Producer of Collecting Data
The procedure of collecting data is presented in chronological order as
follows:
1. Experimental Group
a. Pretest
Before doing treatment, the students of experimental group were given
pretest to find out their basic ability in speaking. The students in experimental
group were asked to speak through interview.
b. Treatment
After giving pretest, the student were given treatment for experimental class.
It spent three weeks that consist of 5 meetings. It took 80 minutes in every
meeting. For details information, the researhcer explain the treatment in the
following steps:
1. The researcher came to the classes and gave explanation to the student
about the purpose of the research.
2. The researcher gave chance to the student to ask some questions about the
reseachers explanation.
3. The reseacher gave explanation about small group discussion in speaking
activity generally. Then explained the small group discussion based on
gender.
28

4. The reseacher devided the student into groups. The composition of each
group must be same gender group, so there were male group and female
group.
5. The reseacher explained the procedure in group discussion and gave them
topic cases to be discussed in three meetings.
6. The students discussed, debated, and found the solution of the topic case
given.
7. The researcher controled the discussion by going around to each group.
8. After discussing their topic, the reseacher asked the student to present their
topic with their group.
9. The student reported the result of the discussion.
10. Finally, the student reflected what they have already learnt.
11. The reseacher concluded the discussion.
c. Posttest
After treatment, the researcher gave posttest to the students to see their
mastery after treatment in speaking. It aimed to find out the difference
achievement of students speaking after treatment. The test was same with pretest.
2. Control Group
a. Pretest
Before doing treatment, the students of control group were given pretest to
find out their basic achievement in speaking. The test was same with the speaking
test which was given to the experimental group.

29

b. Treatment
The control group received the treatment by general explanation. They were
treated in order to find out students achievement without using small group
discussion based on gender.
c. Posttest
After doing treatment, the posttest was given to the students of control
group. The result of pretest and posttest were analyzed in order to know whether
or not the students got progress in speaking without using small group discussion
strategy.
F. Technique of Data Analysis
The technique of data analysis were designed as follows:
1. In measuring the students speaking test, the researcher trancripted the
students answer from the interview. The transcription was subject to be analyzed
by using the following criteria level introduced by Heaton 1988.
a. Accuracy
The Students score on accuracy was classified based on the criteria in the
following table.
Table 1: The criteria score of speaking Accuracy
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 6 Pronunciation is only over clear and almost no
grammatical errors and complete answer
Very Good 5 Pronunciation is slightly influenced by the mother
30

tongue. A few minor grammatical and lexical errors
but most utterance are correct.
Good 4 Pronunciation is clear, a few grammatical and
lexical errors.
Average 3 Pronunciation is influence by the mother tongue,
only a few serious phonological errors, several
grammatical and lexical errors some of which cause
confusion.
Poor 2 Pronunciation is seriously influence by the mother
tongue with errors causing a breakdown in
communication. Many basic grammatical and
lexical errors.
Very poor 1 Serious pronunciation errors as well as many
basic grammatical and lexical errors. No evidence
of having mastered any of the language skills and
areas practiced in the course.
Heaton 1988
b. Fluency
Table 2: The critearia score of speaking Fluency
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 6 Speak without too great an effort with a fairly wide
range of expression. Searches for words occasionally
31

by only one or two unnatural pauses.
Very Good 5 Has to make an effort at times to search for words.
Nevertheless, smooth delivery on the whole and only
a few unnatural pauses.
Good 4 Although he has to make an effort and search for
words, there are not too many unnatural pauses.
Fairly smooth delivery mostly. Occasionally
fragmentary but succeeds in conveying the general
meaning. Fair range of expression.
Average 3 Has to make an effort for much of time. Often has to
search for the desire meaning. Frequently
fragmentary and halting delivery. Almost give up
making the effort at times. Limited range of
expression.
Poor 2 Long pauses while he researches for the desired
meaning. Frequently fragmentary and halting
delivery. Almost give up making the effort at times.
Limited range of expression.
Very poor 1 Full of long and unnatural pauses. Very halting and
fragmentary delivery. At times gives up making the
effort. Very limited range of expression.
Heaton 1988


32

c. Comprehensibility
Table 3: The criteria score of speaking Comprehensibility
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 6 Easy for the listener to understand the speakers
intention and general meaning. Very few
interruptions of clarifications required.
Very Good 5 The speakers intention and general meaning are
fairly clear. A few interruption by the listener for the
sake of clarification are necessary.
Good 4 Most of what the speaker says is easy to follow. His
intention is always clear but several interruptions are
necessary to help him to convey massage or to seek
clarification.
Average 3 The listener can understand a lot of which is said, but
he must constantly seek clarification. Cannot
understand many of the speakers more complex or
longer sentences.
Poor 2 Only small bits (usually short sentences and phrases)
can be understood and then with considerable effort
by someone who is listening to the speaker.
Very poor 1 Hardly anything of what is said can be understood.
Even when the listener make a great effort or
interruptions, the speaker is unable to clarify
anything he seems to have said.
Heaton 1988
33

1) Calculating the score from three components of speaking, the score
system as follows:

Where: X : Score
A : Accuracy
F : Fluency
C : Comprehensibilty
2) Calculating the converted score used the following formula

Where: X : Score
NS : Score of Students
NT : Highest Score
3) Classifying the result from the converted score
Score Classification
9.6 10 Excellent
8.6 9.5 Very good
7.6 8.5 Good
6.6 7.5 Fairly good
5.6 6.5 Fair
3.6 5.5 Poor
0 3.5 Very poor

(Depdikbud, 2004)
4) Calculating the mean score by applying the following formula:

X = A + F + C
34

Where :
X : The mean score
X : The student total score
N : The number of the student
(Gay, 1981)

5) Calculating the standard deviation

Where:
x
2
: The sum of total score
(x) : The amount of total score
N : Number of sample
(Gay, 1981: 298)
6) Calculating the significant difference of the students result in Pre-test
and post-test , the following formulas:



(

) (

35

Where:

X1 = the mean score of the experiment class
X2 = the mean score of the control class
S = combination of the variances between the experiment and the
control group
SS
1
= the sum of different scores in the experiment class
SS
2
= the sum of different scores in control class
n
1
= total number of the sample of the experiment class
n
2
= total number of the sample of the control class
t = test of significance
(Gay, 1981: 327)